How come a top 10 player was the best player in the league for just 1 year?

[0000000]

Kobe was always at least arguably the best player in the league since 2001.
Maybe never clear cut except from 2007 to 2010 IMO.

It's ridiculous how much people underestimate Kobe here.

[Jlamb47]

Peopel hate Kobe to make there favorite player look better
yal are all stup1d

Kobe was always top 3 every year since early 2000's. And idk how Lebron was better in 09 he was playing against weak EAST teams and still didnt go to the finals like Kobe. West > East for the past decades. Lebron play these crappy east teams and needed wade and bosh to make it somewhere. Just appreciate both players. Kobe got 5 of them thangs.

[HurricaneKid]

And idk how Lebron was better in 09 he was playing against weak EAST teams and still didnt go to the finals like Kobe.

LeBron's 2009 season is probably the best season of my lifetime. Not only did his stats blow everyone out of the water on an individual level, but they had a top 10 record of all time as well.

And LBJ did this with a TERRIBLE team. Without LeBron (in 900 min, about the length of a HS season) the Cavs were -5.9pp/100. Extrapolated to a full season this makes them ~3-4th worse team in the league. With LBJ they were +15pp/100. Without him they were -159. With him they were +847. The +1006 is the highest I can find by more than 200 points. And while they lost in the playoffs he was incredible; his postseason was the highest WS/48 of any player in any playoffs ever.

In fact, given how many times this has come up recently I am going to start putting anyone who thinks Kobe was better in 09 on ignore. Because if you think that you simply have no understanding of anything basketball related and I have no interest in your opinion.

[Mr Know It All]

Kobe was always at least arguably the best player in the league since 2001.
Maybe never clear cut except from 2007 to 2010 IMO.

It's ridiculous how much people underestimate Kobe here.

2007

Regular Season: Dirk Nowitzki. Clear cut. 24ppg on 50/40/90. League leader in PER, win shares, and wins produced.

Playoffs: Tim Duncan or Lebron James.

2008

Regular Season: Chris Paul has the best season of his career. Second in PER (Behind Lebron), first in win shares and wins produced. Led a very mediocre New Orleans team to a high seed in the Western conference. Kobe threatened to demand a trade in LA and was appeased when the Lakers snagged a top 5 PF for some young pieces.

Playoffs: Chris Paul led in PER and win shares once again. Playing exceptionally well until bowing out in 7 games against the Spurs in the second round. Kobe played very well until his team was beaten by an overrated Celtics team in the Finals (One that was taken to 7 games by the Hawks, Lebron's baby Cavs, and 6 games by the decaying Pistons).

2009

Regular Season: Lebron James has one of the most statistically dominant seasons of the modern era. League leader in PER, win shares, and wins produced. Starts a run of phenomenal individual play that has lasted until this season.

Playoffs: Kobe was the best player on the team that won the championship, no doubt. Lebron still played exceptionally well for the Cavs but match up problems persisted against a less than impressive Orlando squad led by Dwight Howard.

2010

Regular Season: Lebron James has another statistical season that is incredibly impressive. League leader in PER, win shares, wins produced.

Playoffs: Ditto for this season. Kobe is the best player on the best team in the playoffs. Lebron is statistically more impressive but doesn't have close to the amount of talent.


Someone has to crush the MUH RINGZ myth that continues to be pushed on this board. It is the same kind of people who argue for Eli Manning over Peyton Manning in the NFL because he was carried by a great defense. It is sad and it shows a severe lack of understanding of the game and how team sports work in general. You would think on a forum people would be pragmatic and interested in talking points separate from people like Skip Bayless and Stephen A. Smith, but no, I see user spewing the same anti-intellectual poison.

[NLZ]

Kobe has been arguably the best player for about 5-8 seasons.. and a top 3 (arguably 2) player of the past 15 years... come on now.

[DMAVS41]

Kobe was always at least arguably the best player in the league since 2001.
Maybe never clear cut except from 2007 to 2010 IMO.

It's ridiculous how much people underestimate Kobe here.

I don't think he was the clear cut best player ever really, but you are so right. It's absurd how under-rated Kobe is as a player on here right now.

He wasn't the best player in the league because 3 players better than him have been in the league roughly his entire career.

Shaq, Duncan, and Lebron are all in the top 8 or 9 all time...so of course he isn't going to rack up a lot of years as the best player.

And, Kobe has an argument for best player in the league in 06, 07, 08, 09, and 2010. I don't think he was all those years, but he has legit arguments.

So sick of the underestimating of a top 10 or so player of all time on here. I usually rank Lebron over Kobe, but honestly, the more I think about it....the more I keep coming back to how utterly unimpressive winning with those loaded teams Lebron went to really is. Not to mention the epic collapse in 2011.

I still think Lebron has a ways to go...

[Droid101]

STOP RESPONDING TO TROLL THREADS.

Just report them to the mods and Jeff, as they said they were going to crack down on these and start banning the OPs.

[Stringer Bell]

He wasn't ever clear-cut #1 but he was a clear-cut top player, top 3 or top 5, whatever you want to call it, for like a dozen years.

[0000000]

I don't think he was the clear cut best player ever really, but you are so right. It's absurd how under-rated Kobe is as a player on here right now.

He wasn't the best player in the league because 3 players better than him have been in the league roughly his entire career.

Shaq, Duncan, and Lebron are all in the top 8 or 9 all time...so of course he isn't going to rack up a lot of years as the best player.

And, Kobe has an argument for best player in the league in 06, 07, 08, 09, and 2010. I don't think he was all those years, but he has legit arguments.

So sick of the underestimating of a top 10 or so player of all time on here. I usually rank Lebron over Kobe, but honestly, the more I think about it....the more I keep coming back to how utterly unimpressive winning with those loaded teams Lebron went to really is. Not to mention the epic collapse in 2011.

I still think Lebron has a ways to go...

I agree with your post except one thing. I don't think Duncan is better than Kobe nor has he really been better individually since like 2003 and it's arguable whether he was better or not than Kobe ever. He was in 2002 IMO.
I also think KG was better than Kobe in 2004.
As for Shaq, Kobe was better from 2003 onwards IMO.
As for LeBron, they were neck to neck IMO with Kobe just edgining him out every year until 2 years ago when LeBron became the clear cut best IMO.

I also rate LeBron more highly than Kobe but I think Kobe so far has been better than LeBron, iust slightly though...more often than not.

Kobe was clearly the clear cut best for many years. It was unanimous in the NBA community. Everyone considered Kobe the best, from coaches like Phil, Riley, Pop to role players to executives etc. That period is from 2007 to 2010 IMO.

Why he gets so underrated here, well he is scrutinized. He can score 81 points, people will say it was against bad defense, he didn't have enough assists, shot too much etc. No other player ever came to the same level of scrutiny. Not even close. Also, he is a volume shooter. It's generally viewed as the worst and least likely to win player type. So a lot of people just can't understand Kobe's impact or give him his due. Or alternatively, it makes it far easier to knock him down. Goodc case i. Point here is Duncan. He has team success, and he can be unimpressive. And Kobe could average 30 ppg and people will still be like, Duncan is better than Kobe. Simply because Kobe's a volume shooter. It's a bit more tricky than that with Kobe. He's a lot more than just a volume shooter. As for Kobe vs Duncan, having watched them play against each other many times in the playoffs, Kobe is better. Every Lakers Spurs series I had the same impression.

Despite a lot of scrutniy, people in the NBA know Kobe's value. It's no coincidence he is much higher ranked by the people in the NBA than fans, especially fans here. I mean, a guy who scored 81, had no trouble going over 50 or 60, was scoring 40 every other night like it's nothing....he was the best player in the leaguea t some point.
But people will do anything to take the accomplishment away from Kobe or make it seem less impressive. They"ll be like..MJ 69 pts vs Kobe 81 pts...or Kobe 50 pts vs 20 pts, 20 rebs and shit like that lol. Ultimately, they make Kobe look unimpressive in their minds.

I remember when those same people argued that a guy like Jerry Stackhouse was as good as Kobe but didn't have Shaq so he had to deal with a lot more double teams etc. People won't change ther minds but it is nice to think back on stuff like that and remember how actually stupid they look IMO.

[DMAVS41]

I agree with your post except one thing. I don't think Duncan is better than Kobe nor has he really been better individually since like 2003 and it's arguable whether he was better or not than Kobe ever. He was in 2002 IMO.
I also think KG was better than Kobe in 2004.
As for Shaq, Kobe was better from 2003 onwards IMO.
As for LeBron, they were neck to neck IMO with Kobe just edgining him out every year until 2 years ago when LeBron became the clear cut best IMO.

I also rate LeBron more highly than Kobe but I think Kobe so far has been better than LeBron, iust slightly though...more often than not.

Kobe was clearly the clear cut best for many years. It was unanimous in the NBA community. Everyone considered Kobe the best, from coaches like Phil, Riley, Pop to role players to executives etc. That period is from 2007 to 2010 IMO.

Why he gets so underrated here, well he is scrutinized. He can score 81 points, people will say it was against bad defense, he didn't have enough assists, shot too much etc. No other player ever came to the same level of scrutiny. Not even close. Also, he is a volume shooter. It's generally viewed as the worst and least likely to win player type. So a lot of people just can't understand Kobe's impact or give him his due. Or alternatively, it makes it far easier to knock him down. Goodc case i. Point here is Duncan. He has team success, and he can be unimpressive. And Kobe could average 30 ppg and people will still be like, Duncan is better than Kobe. Simply because Kobe's a volume shooter. It's a bit more tricky than that with Kobe. He's a lot more than just a volume shooter. As for Kobe vs Duncan, having watched them play against each other many times in the playoffs, Kobe is better. Every Lakers Spurs series I had the same impression.

Despite a lot of scrutniy, people in the NBA know Kobe's value. It's no coincidence he is much higher ranked by the people in the NBA than fans, especially fans here. I mean, a guy who scored 81, had no trouble going over 50 or 60, was scoring 40 every other night like it's nothing....he was the best player in the leaguea t some point.
But people will do anything to take the accomplishment away from Kobe or make it seem less impressive. They"ll be like..MJ 69 pts vs Kobe 81 pts...or Kobe 50 pts vs 20 pts, 20 rebs and shit like that lol. Ultimately, they make Kobe look unimpressive in their minds.

I remember when those same people argued that a guy like Jerry Stackhouse was as good as Kobe but didn't have Shaq so he had to deal with a lot more double teams etc. People won't change ther minds but it is nice to think back on stuff like that and remember how actually stupid they look IMO.

Just disagree about Kobe vs Duncan.

Duncan was clearly better from his rookie year up through the 05 season in my opinion. After that...it's debatable in years like 06 and 07...with Kobe clearly being better from 08 through 11...and then it's been debatable since...with the exception of Duncan being better last year.

It's somewhat close in that they are both in that for sure top 11, but if I had to start a franchise with either of these two guys...I don't think twice before taking Duncan. It's not even debatable for me...but again, that is just my opinion.